HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8736 of 2025 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and Shri Rajendra Prasad Lodhi, learned Advocate who has filed vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant which is taken on record. 2. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that daughter of the informant was married to the son of the applicants about four years ago, and adequate dowry was given according to his means. The accused persons were dissatisfied and demanded additional dowry, including a motorcycle, one lakh rupees in cash, and a buffalo. When the deceased expressed her family’s poverty, she was subjected to physical and mental harassment, beaten, threatened, and driven out of the house. She informed her father of this cruelty. She had three daughters and was taunted for not having a son. On 17.06.2025, due to the continued harassment, the deceased committed suicide by hanging. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that they are the parents-in-law of the deceased. The cause of death has been recorded as asphyxia due to antemortem hanging. Except for the ligature mark, no other injury was found on the body of the deceased. It is further submitted that the deceased was under depression as she was unable to deliver a male child, though three daughters were born out of the wedlock. According to the applicants, this is not a case of dowry death or dowry demand. The deceased ended her life owing to her inability to deliver a male child. The allegations made by the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Gyanendra Pathak, Adarsh Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Smt. Rama Devi And Another .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy Deptt. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) complainant stand contradicted by the statement of his own son-in-law, Rakesh Kumar, which is on record as Annexure No. 6 to the bail application. The prosecution allegations are stated to be general and sweeping, with no specific role attributed to the present applicants. 4. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. 5. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the bail application, contending that an independent witness, namely Durgesh Kumar Mishra, has supported the prosecution version. 6. On due consideration of the facts that the allegations in the prosecution case are general in nature; except for the ligature mark, no other antemortem injury was found on the body of the deceased; there is no allegation of cruelty soon before her death; the charge sheet has already been filed and the applicants are in custody since 22.06.2025 without any criminal antecedents, I am of the view that this is a fit case for granting bail to the applicants. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let the applicant Smt. Rama Devi and Barati Lal, involved in Case Crime No.-290/2025, Under Sections- 80(2),85 B.N.S. and 3/4 D.P. Act., Police Station-Khairighat, District-Baharaich, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. BAIL No. 8736 of 2025 2 (iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him in accordance with law. (vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. (now Section 84 BNSS) is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A IPC (now Section 209 of BNS). 9. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are confined to the present bail application and shall have no bearing on the merits of the trial. September 12, 2025 R.C. BAIL No. 8736 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench